I am almost ready to buy my screen now and I have decided to go with the XD as it's the brightest AT screen I could find and after spending hours viewing lots of materials both still images and BluRay movies, both me and my friends that that XD looks the best. BTW: This is my own and my friend's opinions. You should always get your own sample and make your own decision on what screens best fit your home theater.

Please note that I have not tested any of their Acoustic Properties. We know the specs for the XD pretty well as it's published on the Seymour website (assuming it's accurate). The falcon still needed to be tested. With a tighter weave, I would assume it's going to lose out at least in a small bit in terms of acoustic transparency.. but that's just conjecture at this point.

My review of the screens are as follows:

Falcon:

- Weave is visible to about 8 feet. People with very sharp eyesight might be able to see them at about 10 feet (Note: weave is only visible with bright white scenes and not very visible for regular movie scenes).
- Contrast a bit better than XD (black is slightly blacker, some colors are deeper)
- Brightness level loses to XD but beats EN4K. I would say, from the photos below as you can see yourself, the gain level of the Falcon is right in the middle of the XD and the EN4K. From what we know, it's published by Seymour that their XD is 20% brighter than their EN4K, so I would say the Falson is 10% dimmer than the XD.

Centerstage XD:

- Weave visible to about 10 feet and disappears at about 11-12 feet depending on your eyesight. And this only applies to very bright/white scenes. For amost all movie scenes, I could not see it even at 6-8 feet (or rather would not notice it if i wasn't squinting my eyes and purposely looking for it).
- Contrast slightly less than either the Falcon or EN4K, but it's hardly noticeable in moving pictures. For still images it's noticeable.
- Gain - This has the most gain. And it looks the best to me in terms of the 'pop' factor. Skin tones are the most natural and translucent, compared to the 'duller' EN4K or Falcon.

Summary:

If you're going to be sitting beyond 10 feet, I would really suggest the XD. If you're sitting really close, then the Falson,.. I really couldn't recommend the EN4K because it's just so darn dark... You'll need a light canon of a projector... or, if your screen is really small...

Photos below are shown in such a way:

Left: FalconMiddle: XDRight : EN4K

Note: Seymour have published that the EN4K material is 20% dimmer than the XD, and as you can see the Left looks almost exactly in the middle in terms of brightness between the XD and the EN4K, so my initial statement that the Falcon is about 10% dimmer is just about right. Without a proper measurement, I'll say it'll be around that ball-park, give or take a few percentage.

See for yourself:

In these last two scenes, the differences not as much but still visible there. When watching a full movie, the XD will have more pop overall and colors are more vibrant.

I just happened to stumble upon the Cirrus Screen AT Slate Gray Fallstreak. Its listed as 2.5 gain. I wonder how accurate that is. I haven't seen any AT screen with gain that high or even above 1.4. Have you taken a look at their sample?

I just happened to stumble upon the Cirrus Screen AT Slate Gray Fallstreak. Its listed as 2.5 gain. I wonder how accurate that is. I haven't seen any AT screen with gain that high or even above 1.4. Have you taken a look at their sample?

I have a feeling that this is a microperf screen, like those you see in cinemas. They basically have tiny holes poked into them.

Those screens will 'alter' your sound and you'll need a special processor to get the 'correct' sound back. And i noticed they said sitting distance 17 feet minimum which makes me think it's micro-perf. Micro-perf have holes that are pretty large and visible for a great distance. To me, unless you have a mega home theater, they are not suitable.

Both the Centerstage XD and the Falcon screens are fabric/weave materials.

I have a feeling that this is a microperf screen, like those you see in cinemas. They basically have tiny holes poked into them.

Those screens will 'alter' your sound and you'll need a special processor to get the 'correct' sound back. And i noticed they said sitting distance 17 feet minimum which makes me think it's micro-perf. Micro-perf have holes that are pretty large and visible for a great distance. To me, unless you have a mega home theater, they are not suitable.

Both the Centerstage XD and the Falcon screens are fabric/weave materials.

Thanks for the direct comparison. I have samples of both XD and Falcon as well.
Your comments about visible weave are bang on.
I didn't find such a difference in brightness between my two samples however, in fact they appeared to be indistinguishable in that regard.
My sample of XD is a couple years old so I wonder if the coating has been tweaked slightly since. Interesting.

Thanks for the direct comparison. I have samples of both XD and Falcon as well.
Your comments about visible weave are bang on.
I didn't find such a difference in brightness between my two samples however, in fact they appeared to be indistinguishable in that regard.
My sample of XD is a couple years old so I wonder if the coating has been tweaked slightly since. Interesting.

The brightness is only visible and very noticeable on bright scenes. Try it and you should see it. Overall I would say its about 10 percent brighter.